Nigel Kukard wrote:
>Sorry, just to understand this a bit better, you're deferring not rejecting?

Yes. It's just that each "reject" is counted as an error by Postfix and it 
eventually drops the connection.

>> BTW - how is the message size quota handled ? That can't be known reliably 
>> until end of data so presumably the recipient list must be getting held for 
>> that ?
>
>The message size is increased at end-of-data stage, at that time we have 
>a list of recipients which afaik is what we multiple the size by and 
>bump up the counter.

That's what I thought - I'd noticed in the logs that tracking updates for 
message count all come before updates for message size.

How hard would it be to do the same with message count ? It would solve my 
problem - though I guess others may disagree. It would still leave the 
situation where more than one message is being received concurrently, and part 
way through the tracking value is updated such that further recipients are 
deferred. But at least one message would be handled, and the tracking value 
wouldn't be incorrectly increased for any failed messages.

Attachment: smime 21.p7s
Description: mailforge

_______________________________________________
Users mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.policyd.org/mailman/listinfo/users_lists.policyd.org

Reply via email to